Dear Michele Bachmann,
My understanding is that you think it would be a good idea for presidential candidates to throw their birth certificates on the table.
I have a better idea.
I think all presidential candidates should place their brains on the table, starting with yours. I would find that to be far more revealing and helpful to the public.
Love,
Space Cowboy
Hi. I'm Tronald Dump, and I am running for President of the United States.
Now, I know what you're thinking: Who the heck is this gumball and why on earth would I vote for him? Good question! Let me tell you a little about myself.
I am, according to tens of minutes of research I did at Ancestry.com, the fifth cousin of billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump. But don't let the uncanny resemblance and our shared record of bankruptcy fool you! We are nothing alike. For one, I do not own a gold-plated toilet. For another, I believe our president is an American citizen.
Also, I have never been the star of a network reality series—although my cable access cooking show, "A Braising Grace with Tronald Dump," was very popular in the mid-nineties.
Most importantly, however, while Cousin Donnie (we have not met, but I am sure that is what he would want me to call him if we did) is a conservative, I am a liberal.
There are a lot of liberal causes that are important to me—net neutrality, habeas corpus, civil liberties—but perhaps none so close to my heart AND my brain as reproductive rights, which is why I feel it's so vital, especially now as a liberal presidential candidate, to get out there and lecture women on how stupid they are if they don't vote for me.
Listen, ladies, I don't know if you're aware or not, but the Republicans are really against abortion. Frankly, I'd be surprised if any of you gals could have missed that memo, but I know sometimes it helps to have an objective source tell you these things.
You know how they call themselves "pro-life"…? Well, that's a laugh! They're not pro-life at all. You've probably never thought of it this way before, but since Republicans don't support universal healthcare and do support wars, they're more like PRO-DEATH. And here's another protip for ya, sisters: Being against abortion is pretty hostile to your quality of life, if you don't want to have a baby.
So here's the big 411: If a Republican president gets elected, he—or SHE (feminism)—is going to replace all the decrepit Supreme Court justices with rightwingers who hate abortions and then they're going to overturn Roe v. Wade and then you're gonna be shit outta luck!
I know what you're thinking: What have you Democrats done for us lately? Well, I'LL TELL YOU. We've nominated two women (not too shabby) to the Supreme Court to stand on the line and guard Roe for the rest of you lot.
Now, I've skimmed (tl;dr) some of your complaints about how the Democrats are using abortion rights as a bargaining chip with the Republicans, and about how the Democratic executive and Democratic Senate majority aren't doing bupkis to create a counter-narrative to the national onslaught of anti-abortion bills in state legislatures, and about how the Democrats throw women's rights under the bus every time it's politically expedient, and about how the current Democratic president uses language that plays to rightwing frames on abortion rights, and all the rest of that gobbledygook, and, frankly, I don't find your arguments very compelling.
Partly that's because I didn't really bother reading them (hysterical), but mostly it's because I'm mad that you're going to ruin everything for the rest of us with your principles (wtf).
I need to get elected to protect your rights, ladies, and if that means I have to occasionally undermine your rights to do it, that's just how the game is played. You just don't understand politics, is all. It's very sophisticated stuff.
So just settle down and vote for me, Tronald Dump, Democratic candidate for president of the USA.
We all know you've got nowhere else to go, anyway—and I'm sure we can all agree like ADULTS that merely failing to protect your rights is in no way as terrible as actively attacking them.
You can read more of my detailed policy proposals to not make things worse unless I have to under "Dump on Women" at my campaign website: www.geocities.fart/dump2012.
Tronald Dump has been a fauxgressive concern troll since he first got a boner blaming Nader voters for the 2000 election that was decided by the Supreme Court. He is not related to Donald Trump.
[Trigger warning for Islamophobia, mention of sexual violence.]
Reporting from the Freedom Federation's "The Awakening 2011" conference ("Raising Our Voices: Equipping and empowering a New Revolution / Because our Faith matters. Because our Freedom matters."—sure), Think Progress' Scott Keyes shares a delightful tale of anti-Sharia activist Frank Gaffney and anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist getting all up in each other's grills about just how much bigotry in the GOP is too much. Or whatever.
Norquist has HAD IT with these extremists, people! And to put that into perspective, let us recall that Norquist has famously said shit like: "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." And: "Bipartisanship is another name for date rape."
Now he's a Republican moderate.
[Related Reading: "Where Did We Go Wrong?"]
[Trigger warning for homophobia; dehumanization.]
Asked if she agrees with the position of The Family Leader, a virulently anti-gay group in Iowa before whom she was making an appearance, that "homosexuality is a public health hazard akin to second hand smoke," Rep. Michele Bachmann couldn't come up with an answer.
Think Progress' Igor Volsky: Congresswoman, some groups — including this one, I believe — have argued that homosexuality is a public health crisis akin to second-hand smoking. I was wondering if you agreed with that.Its patently absurd that Bachmann was startled by the question and did not have a response ready. Apart from the fact that any decent person would reflexively disavow such manifest nonsense, Bachmann should have been at least minimally aware of what the group with which she was affiliating is promoting: The Family Leader (nice name, btw) considers its "public health hazard" position central to its message and actively promotes "gay conversion therapies."
Bachmann: Um. I — I don't have an answer on that. I don't have an answer. Why don't I have another question.
When was the last time you heard a song for the first time and became instantly enamored of it? Today I got an e-mail for a new show that's playing in NYC called We're Gonna Die by playwright Young Jean Lee, and she posted a demo of one of the show's songs.
I cannot stop listening to it, and I think I have to see the show now.
Hey, you remember the president's bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, right? The very white, very male, and very terrifying collection of geniuses otherwise known as the Catfood Commission, for their hot recommendations to "to get people to pay more for their health care and retirement with money they don't have," co-chaired by Alan "Milk Cow With 310 Million Tits" Simpson...?
Sure you do.
And no doubt you'll be thrilled to hear that President Obama "will not blaze a fresh path when he delivers a much-anticipated speech Wednesday afternoon at George Washington University. Instead, he is expected to offer support for the commission's work and a related effort underway in the Senate to develop a strategy for curbing borrowing. Obama will frame the approach as a responsible alternative to the 2012 plan unveiled last week by House Republicans, according to people briefed by the White House."
So: Extreme right-wing plan vs. center-right bipartisan plan. Peachy!
Susie doesn't mince words: "All the hoo-hah over the Ryan plan was only to soften us up for what Obama wanted all along: The plan from his handpicked members of the Catfood Commission. Just like he did with the healthcare plan, he sat down with the players and worked out his own back-door 'bipartisan' deal to sidestep that messy democracy thing he finds so distasteful."
Also see [TW for ablist language]: David Dayen, who notes, quite rightly, that this is "a pre-emptive surrender, and a needless one at that."
Well. Only if you support progressive policies.
If you fancy yourself the next coming of Ronald Reagan, I guess everything is turning out just fucking right.
UPDATE: House Democrats have sent a letter to Obama warning him that, if he wants to retain their support, he will not include cuts to Social Security in the deficit reduction program to be outlined Wednesday night: "[W]e remain concerned that the Bowles-Simpson proposal may serve as a starting point for budget negotiations. We consider this plan to be flawed in several key areas, especially with respect to its proposed cuts to Social Security Benefits. We believe that any proposal that includes cuts to a popular, fiscally sound program lacks credibility and does not reflect the political center."
"Twelve dimensional chess, assholes!"—Me, upon reading that Servicemembers United, a nonprofit organization representing LGBTQ active servicemembers and veterans, was not invited to the launch of Michelle Obama's and Jill Biden's Joining Forces initiative, "a program meant to raise awareness of the challenges faced by members of the military and their families," because, according to the office of the First Lady, Don't Ask Don't Tell "still remains the law." Indeed. A law which, as Servicemembers United's executive director Alexander Nicholson points out, "does not apply to the civilians who work at their advocacy and service organizations."
[H/T to Spudsy, who wryly comments: "Don't invite, don't include."]
[Trigger warning for violence; spoiler warning for The Killing.]
So, ever since Donald Trump starting yammering about running for president, Kenny Blogginz and I have had this running gag about a presidential candidate named Tronald Dump, who attends his campaign appearances in a Tron suit, often with a turd on his head.
This morning, as part of a tradition of granting magical wishes, I made this for KBlogz:
This gem just showed up in the moderation queue. In honor of Equal Pay Day, we decided to share its rich wisdom with you all.
How do feminists justify lying about men as they do?
You all know the wage gap is a big lie -- women don't get paid any less if their lazy assess ever do the same work as men, but how often does that ever happen? Right. That 77% figure is saying women do 23% less work than men and so not surprisingly they get paid less on average. Women don't work as man hours as men, women don't do the nasty jobs men do, women don't do dangerous jobs men do, women don't do stressful jobs and women tend to take jobs with a lot of personal fulfillment. Men have careers but then men don't get to marry a woman who pays their bills.
So celebrate your day for how lazy women are while spreading the bigoted lie that women are paid less for the same work. You all know you are liars.
As we know, spring has sprung once Dougie has sniffed a bluebonnet. This past weekend, he made our dreams come true:
The theme from H.R. Pufnstuff:
28: The number of states in which anti-choicers "are pressuring state lawmakers to pass legislation restricting private health insurance plans from covering abortion services."
Currently, under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, private insurance companies that participate in public exchanges are allowed to provide abortion coverage. However, women seeking abortion coverage must make two separation payments - the first for abortion coverage and the second for the remaining cost of coverage.Meanwhile, the Guttmacher Institute reports today that, though March 31 of this year, "legislators introduced 916 measures related to reproductive health and rights in the 49 state legislatures that had convened their regular session. (Louisiana's legislature will not convene until late April.)" Additionally:
Adam Sonfield, a public policy expert at the Guttmacher Institute (pdf) stated, "Every additional restriction is adding to the probability that insurance companies will throw up their hands and say, 'This isn't worth our time anymore.'"
As a whole, the proposals introduced this year are more hostile to abortion rights than in the past: Fifty-six percent of the bills introduced so far this year seek to restrict abortion access, compared with 38% in 2010.Swell.
...At the same time, legislators are proposing little in the way of proactive initiatives aimed at expanding access to reproductive health-related services. This stands in sharp contrast to recent years, when a range of initiatives to promote comprehensive sex education, permit expedited STI treatment for patients’ partners and ensure insurance coverage of contraception were adopted. For the moment, at least, supporters of reproductive health and rights are almost uniformly playing defense at the state level.
This started out as a comment to Brian's guest post about the #thingsfatpeoplearetold hashtag, but it got really long, so I made it its own post.
One of the things by which I was struck, once again, as I read through the shared stories, is how truly tough the life of a fat person is—and how pointedly that belies the narrative that fat people are lazy.
Totally aside from whatever factors underlie Teh Dreaded Fat—which may in some cases include a lack of exercise, for a multitude of reasons, one of which might be physical laziness—being fat, living the life of a fat person, is not a life for a lazy person. It is hard work to move every day through a world that hates you.
Facing each day of one's life knowing that what awaits is navigating a sea of prejudice squarely rooted in the basic assumption that one is less than, a disgusting, shameful figure symbolizing sloth and avarice, too contemptible to even warrant pity no less dignity and respect, is not for the lazy, nor the faint of heart, nor the weak.
Knowing that just the mere act of walking down the street is likely to elicit moos and epithets and admonishments to hide one's body away from the world, that doing something, anything in public while fat may elicit exhortations to exercise, while exercising itself elicits exhortations to stop being so fat in public, does not make for a life that suits laziness.
Having to battle doctors for basic healthcare, and employers for equal pay, and friends and family for safe boundaries, and retail clerks for clothes, and ourselves for self-worth despite a metric fuckton of internalized narratives that we deserve nothing but scorn is not for the trepidatious.
Being criticized by strangers for what one is wearing, or eating, or looks like; receiving unsolicited "suggestions" about diets and exercise and weight-loss surgery; getting back-handed compliments about having a "pretty face" or not being "that fat" or being "proportional" or some variation on doing the best with the supposedly self-evidently terrible hand we've been dealt; being corrected when you describe yourself as fat, as if it's not a neutral descriptor but something of which to be ashamed; hearing people who purport to care about us express amazement that we have found partners who love us, or have found professional success at jobs we love, or have put together a stylish outfit; these are not aspects of a life that suits laziness.
Having a thin friend or relative look you in the face and tell you that zie can't believe you are happy, when zie is not, that you have a fulfilling life, when zie does not, that you are confident, when zie is not, with the clear implication that you don't deserve to be happy, fulfilled, confident, content, loved because you're fat, is not part of a life for the timid.
Moving through a world which marginalizes fat bodies and privileges bodies not like yours, a world which is designed to facilitate and uphold that privilege, a world which indoctrinates you and everyone around you into that system of privilege and socializes you to believe is the natural and right and immutable state of the world, a world full of shills for that system of privilege and bullies who crawl out of the woodwork in droves to kick you back into line if you dare to question the message, a world decorated with images to remind you that your body is wrong, your body is bad, your body is less than, a world in which it is acceptable for people to believe that accurate conclusions can be drawn about your behavior based on your body and that expressing negative judgments based on those conclusions is their right and obligation, a world in which eliminationist language about people with bodies like yours is not considered controversial, a world in which you, your personhood, your very humanity is challenged on a near-constant basis under the auspices of concern for your "health," is not a world that indulges laziness, cowardice, or weakness.
You've got to be strong to live the life of a fat person. Strong as fuck.
People who accuse fat folks of indolence, or pusillanimity, or weakness (particular of the emotional sort) have, quite evidently, no idea of what being fat, living the life of a fat person, is really like. At least not the life of a fat person who has the unmitigated temerity to believe fervently in hir own right to exist, to participate, to live in a space, internally and externally, which isn't ruled by self-loathing.
What would it take for you to live in a world that hates you?
It takes an indomitable will to live life while fat, in the shadow of ubiquitous reminders that we're doing so in direct contravention of the expectation that we should be secreting ourselves away, and the incessant grim predictions of an allegedly imminent demise.
I've said it before and I'll say it once again: It remains a radical act to be fat and happy. If you're fat, you're not only meant to be unhappy, but deeply ashamed of yourself, projecting at all times an apologetic nature, indicative of your everlasting remorse for having wrought your monstrous self upon the world. You are certainly not meant to be bold, or assertive, or confident—and should you manage to overcome the constant drumbeat of messages that you are ugly and unsexy and have earned equally society's disdain and your own self-hatred, should you forget your place and walk into the world one day with your head held high, you are to be reminded by the cow-calls and contemptuous looks of perfect strangers that you are not supposed to have self-esteem; you don't deserve it. Being publicly fat and happy is hard; being publicly, shamelessly, unshakably fat and happy is an act of both will and bravery.
Of all the #thingsfatpeoplearetold, it is a scandal and a disgrace that "You are strong" is rarely among them.
Today is "Equal Pay Day," the day which "symbolizes how far into 2011 women must work to earn what men earned in 2010."
When you read/hear/think about Equal Pay Day today, remember that it is based on an average: Pay disparities across populations affect women of color, transgender women, women with disabilities, and/or single mothers without parenting help more profoundly.
Last year, the Ms. Foundation for Women, in conjunction with the Center for Community Change, completed a survey (pdf) which found that while four out of five US respondents described themselves "as very or somewhat concerned about the economy," and had been concerned for an average two years, "55% of African American women say they have been worried about it for five years or more" and "Latinas have been particularly hard hit, with two-thirds saying their personal situation has been affected by the country's economic situation and more than half reporting that they or someone in their household has lost a job in the past year."
The survey also found a stark practical effect of the pay disparity: "35% of women say they have $500 or less in savings. Latinas, in particular, report low levels of savings, with more than half saying they have $500 or less."
The reality that Equal Pay Day symbolizes is this: Pay disparity creates a hole out of which it's incredibly difficult to dig—and every intersectional marginalization of one's identity represents the real possibility that hole will be even deeper than average.
Next time someone mentions bootstraps to you, tell them you sold your bootstraps to pay the electrical bill on April 12.
[Trigger warning for sexual violence.]
It's kind of amazing that this restriction doesn't exist already, but Illinois state is working to pass a law that would prohibit convicted predators from practicing medicine in the state:
Health care workers would lose their licenses permanently upon conviction of a sex crime or forcible felonies under legislation the House overwhelmingly passed today.To address the inevitable protest: No, that does not mean any healthcare practitioner who is accused of a sex crime would immediately have to begin notifying all patients. There is, particularly in rape cases, a threshold of credibility that allegations must pass, often even despite guidelines that stipulate otherwise, before an official criminal investigation is opened.
Inspired by a Tribune investigation, the bill would require health care workers, including doctors, with charges pending to have chaperones with them if they keep treating patients before their trials. They would need to notify all of their patients in writing about any pending criminal allegations.
The measure now moves to the Senate. Sponsoring Rep. Will Burns, D-Chicago and 4th Ward alderman-elect, expects it to pass easily.
Burns hailed the series for pointing out the problems with current regulations and doctors and advocates of victims of sexual assault for being able to "get this done."
No person whose name is on a sex offender registry would be eligible to get a medical license under the bill.
